Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Stop Me If You've Heard This: College Football Needs A Playoff

It's been a minute since I've written anything, and I appreciate all of the emails you people have sent my way since I left for Vegas. To be honest, I'm dealing with a few major developments that have put my mind in a strange place. Lately it's been impossible for me to sit in front of my computer and bang out anything of substance. Writing has always been difficult for me, but I've never experienced anything like this-----and I'm really not sure when I'm going to snap out of it.

Sad thing is, there's a myriad of topics on my mind at the moment (including the topic of this post). The Bearcat hoopers are making daddy proud, Cameron Heyward validated every glowing comment I've ever made about the guy, the goddamn Bengals are going to host a playoff game and I just got back from Vegas.

Beyond all of that, there's Nick Van Exel. Not only was his birthday less than a week ago...and not only was he in town last night as a member of the Texas Southern coaching staff...but his spitting image, Milwaukee's Brandon Jennings, came into the league and turned me into an eleven-year-old boy all over again. So, like I said, I have an endless bucket of crap to write about...and yet...I'm struggling. Big time. I'm not in need of pity, but I would like you to be patient; I haven't given up my dream of making this sucker work. But right now I have no idea how to make that a possibility.


What you're about to read is something you may have partially read before. About a year ago I wrote passionately about college football's need for a tournament (I did this in two parts: here and here). I feel like I made solid arguments all the way around, but things have changed since then. And, of course, UC is involved this year. So, I updated last year's posts and re-worded some arguments, and what remained was the following piece:

The Cincinnati University Fighting Bearcats have ***no chance*** of playing in this year's BCS championship game, and that's more than a little stupid. The same can be said about undefeated mid majors TCU and Boise State, two teams who are good enough to beat absolutely anybody on a perfect night.

(***This is under the assumption that Texas and the Florida/Alabama winner finish their seasons without a loss***)

But arguing on behalf of UC and Boise and TCU is boring. For one, everyone else is doing it. For deux, it's only a small part of the argument I want to make. That is, the one I'm about to make.

I used to roll my eyes every time my dad suggested a 64-team tournament in college football; I agreed the current setup was a disaster, but I was more of an 8- or 16-team guy. But I've come around. Dad was right.

Sure, a No. 16 seed could never win it all, and it'd be incredibly difficult for a No. 12 seed to advance to the Sweet 16, but so what? How's that any different than March Madness?

I cringe with every excuse made for the BCS, and I start throwing my nephew's Hot Wheels across the room whenever I hear how the current setup gives college football the most exciting regular season of all the major sports.

Who the hell cares? Wouldn't you like to have the most exciting postseason of all the major sports? If that doesn't make sense to you, think of it in terms of pornography: Would you ever hear a porn star claiming to be the best kisser in the industry? Of course not! But that's the kind of ridiculousness we're dealing with here.

Regardless, aren't tournaments fun? College hoops doesn't always crown the best team, but I never hear anyone complaining.


The folks making up the anti-playoff community usually envision at least two problems that aren't really problems: The season being too long (but it would really only effect four teams) and something about academic schedules (as if the coaches care about the "student" in student-athlete).

You could start the season every year on the last Saturday in August, trim regular season schedules from 12 to 11 (or even 12 to 10 and force the Big Ten and Pac 10 to play conference championships), give every team one bye week and the regular season would finish before Thanksgiving. Start the tournament the following Saturday and all but four teams are left on New Year's Day. It really is that simple.

Isn't this a better plan than the ridiculous BCS? Wouldn't you rather see a 64-team field over a measly four teams competing? Think about this year: Who would be your 4-team field? Florida and Alabama (regardless of the game's outcome), Texas (assuming they win, and maybe even if they don't) and...who? UC? TCU? Boise? It still wouldn't be fair. Keep your four-team playoff to yourself. The only reason you even suggest it is because (a.) you heard someone else say it, or (b.) you haven't really thought it through. Trust me, having only four teams compete for the title accomplishes nothing. We need to go bigger, dammit! This is America!


Again, think of it in terms of March Madness.

Every year the tourney offers a team (or teams) a shot at redemption. Whether it be a young team pulling it together at just the right time or a team that struggled with injury/chemistry issues early in the season, the tournament always offers a team or two who possess the right amount of swagger and skill to pull off the unthinkable.

But college football doesn't work like that.

College football has no place for Miami, who is very young, but also a nightmare matchup when they're hitting on all cylinders.

College football has no place for Stanford or Pitt, two dangerous teams who came out of nowhere this year to scare the BeJesus out of traditional heavyweights.

College football has no place for Iowa, who -- far as I can tell -- is getting screwed over more than everyone who isn't undefeated. They lost their QB, Ricky Stanzi, to injury early in a close loss to a better-than-mediocre Northwestern bunch. And then, with Stanzi still out, they took Ohio State to overtime (in Columbus!) before falling. That's it. According to me the Hawkeyes are still a very good team, and it would be nice if a healthy Ricky Stanzi led them onto the field in the NCAA tournament. But they'll never know if they were good enough to compete for the title, because the NCAA is penalizing them for a mid-season injury. Iowa's reward: They'll be playing in the Nondescript Bowl, against a nondescript team, in a game we'll probably not watch and undoubtedly won't remember.

Another team I feel sorry for is Oklahoma. The Sooners' Heisman-winning QB Sam Bradford injured his shoulder in an early-season loss to BYU. The thinking at the time was, If they can stay afloat without him, maybe he can return and lead the Sooners to a one-loss season and (maybe) they could play for the BCS championship. That was just stupid. Bradford was rushed back and he re-injured his shoulder. The Sooners continued to lose games, Bradford (a junior) declared for the NFL draft, and his career might never be the same (I'm being dramatic, but it's a possibility).

Now, what if Oklahoma held Bradford out a few more weeks, letting him fully heal, and geared up for the tournament? Chances are, they still wouldn't be good enough to make a Final Four run, but you never know. Either way, can you imagine the Sooners grabbing a No. 9 seed and winning in round one? Now you're looking at something like an Alabama-Oklahoma bloodbath before the Sweet Sixteen.

Seriously, how much fun would that be?

So, you can argue for Boise and TCU and Cincinnati, but it accomplishes very little. Your argument needs expansion.


Yeah, these bowls sure are a lot of fun.

You know what was my favorite bowl game last year? If you guessed the EagleBank Bowl, in the words of Jules from Pulp Fiction, "You a smart mutha f**ka." Except I'm joking. It was the dumbest bowl game in the history of dumb bowl games, and I didn't even watch it. Know why? Because Wake Forest and Navy, two boring squads with no national following, were playing a rematch of a regular season game three months prior. No intrigue, nothing at stake, no audience (aside from gamblers and family members). Allow me to misuse the word literally here: There was literally no reason to watch last year's EagleBank Bowl.

But if Wake Forest and Navy had squared up last year in the first round of last year's tournament, nobody would've cared that it was a rematch. Sure, it wouldn't have been a dream matchup, but the ratings would've quintupled (or quinjillioned) those of the EagleBank Bowl. The reason: office pools. Every mom in America fills them out, and they're far and away the number one reason why the NCAA tournament is what it is.

But I digress...

Look, this is a football-crazed country, and there is absolutely no way a 64-team tournament wouldn't be bloody successful. Sure, there are probably a handful of kinks I've failed to recognize, but I'm sure the college educated gentlemen who comprise the NCAA could figure it out with some quickness. Well, maybe not. But it doesn't mean I'm crazy, either.

I'm not crazy, am I? Am I crazy?


From the Oh Yeah Department: Stop telling me 64 teams would be too many, and stop reminding me how many more teams compete in D-I hoops compared to D-I football. I know. Really, I do. But I also don't care. The NBA and NHL send roughly half their leagues to the playoffs - and often times multiple teams with losing records - and I don't see a massive uproar. Plus, a whopping 68 teams are competing in bowl games this year! Whatever. I know I'll never see the day, but a 64-team tournament is doable. And for those of you who disagree, I'd love you to email me and tell me how much you hated when No. 13 seed George Mason shocked the world and made the 2006 Final Four.

-Brad Spieser (


Thursday, November 19, 2009

Headed To Vegas!

I was awake for a total of nine hours on Tuesday.

It's a very real possibility that I won't sleep a total of nine hours for the next four days.

Reason? Nevada.

It would be an understatement to say that I'm excited about traveling to the desert.


As is always the case when I travel (especially to Nevada), I'm a little behind as far as this site is concerned. Before I left, I desperately wanted to write about Brandon Jennings and Cameron Heyward and Mike Zimmer and how much I hate white people, but that just ain't gonna happen. I still have to purchase mini-toiletries and lip balm and chewing gum. And, of course, I need to remind myself not to forget my cell phone charger and an extra wife beater. (And should I bring a fancy pair of trousers?)

As you can plainly see, I'm a little stressed at the moment.

Plus, I have to leave for work in a few minutes.


So, because I'm predictably behind on my day, there will be no Vickers picks this weekend. Sadly. And I'm not bringing my Dell computer on the trip, either. However, I will document every single sports wager I make over the course of the weekend -- and try to estimate how much I risked at various gaming tables -- and I think you'll soon find that I'm the walking definition of "degenerate."

I promise you: This will blow your mind.

I promise you: You will lose respect for me in less than one week.

Wish me luck!



I love you.

-Brad Spieser (

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

The Bengals Can Win The Super Bowl! No, Seriously

Things are happening with these Bengals. Yes, they are. Things. Happening. Like, winning in a way we've never really seen before. And by "we've," I mean me. And by "before," I mean since I was nine. The Bengals are playing a boring brand of football, but it's legitimate. No smoke, no mirrors. The Bengals are freaking good, and dare I say it...Super Bowl Contenders.

Raise your hand if you want my thoughts on the current state of Cincinnati's professional football team? That's what I thought...

1. I get the feeling that the Larry Johnson signing is viewed positively, and I'm not really sure why that is. For one (and most importantly), he might not be any good. Over his last 483 carries, dating back to game 1 of the '07 season, Johnson's averaged 3.7 yards per carry. For deux, is he really needed? The Bengals next three games are against Oakland, Detroit and Cleveland, and the Bengals will be overwhelming favorites in each. So, I know Cedric Benson is a little banged up, and I know Bernard Scott can't fully be trusted, but my Aunt Dorothy could be the Bengals' starting RB for those games and they'll still likely be 10-2. For three, he's a dumb jackass, and he always has been, dating back to his days at Penn State. The dude is a frontrunner -- which can be okay -- but the second things aren't going his way, he becomes a cancer of epic proportions.

The Larry Johnson move might end up being a smart move, and it may be of no consequence. But I just feel as if the whole thing was completely unnecessary. Why risk screwing up perfect chemistry??

2. Chad Ochocinco was once one of the more brilliant deep threats in American football, and then he wasn't. Why is that? To the best of my knowledge he's still capable of blowing by defenders; in fact, every highlight of one of Ochocinco's receptions shows DBs still very much on their heels when chasing No. 85 around. I know he's still got it, and I'm guessing the rest of the team knows he's still got it. So, why -- with Chris Henry out for the season -- isn't Ochocinco being sent deep several times each game (or rather, why isn't Carson Palmer attempting deep passes more frequently)? It seems to me that I'm more concerned with this than others-----trust me, this will be an issue come playoff time. Look at it this way: Even without Henry, the Bengals have the personnel to go deep, and are more or less refusing to unleash that weapon. Doesn't that seem silly to you? Plus, merely trying a deep ball is almost as important as connecting on one. It softens up the defense. And what about the possibility of pass interference...

3. Why aren't we hearing more about the progress being made by first rounder Andre Smith? This could mean he's not making any, but I choose to believe it's simply because the Bengals are winning football matches with greater regularity than in recent years. Whatever the case, isn't it nice to envision a scenario where Andre Smith works his way into (at the minimum) obvious-running-down shape? Let's not forget, he's probably the best lineman on the team (and unquestionably the most talented). Nobody ever said the guy didn't love football, or play his ass off at Alabama. Smith's red flags included dealings with an agent (and other knuckle-headedness), weight concerns and is he an effective pass-blocker?

But if he's fit enough to play -- and if his repaired foot isn't at risk -- Smith can be a major asset in the running game come January. If nothing else, the Bengals basically get an extra first round pick next season.

Speaking of January, let's talk about February, the month that features Super Bowl XLIV, a game the Bengals are worthy of competing in...

I'm serious, people.

4. The Bengals really are contenders for the big prize, and it's for reasons I never could have imagined. Namely, defense.

5. In case my eyes are deceiving me, Brandon Johnson is a Pro Bowl linebacker. He's versatile and fast and smart and he makes plays all over the field. And...Jesus, I love watching that guy play.

6. In case my eyes are deceiving me, Jonathan Fanene is the best defensive end I've seen wear a Bengals uniform.

And you know what? Marvin Lewis deserves a ton of credit for this. Through his first three professional seasons (05-07), Fanene played in twenty-one of a possible forty-eight contests, recording 12 tackles and 1 sack. As a player who was making very little money, Fanene was injured much too often to ever be counted on. Most of the time, these sort of players get cut. But Lewis saw something (probably practice-field dominance), and keeping Fanene on the roster could go down as the best decision Marvin Lewis ever made.

I see Fanene as a dominant force at defensive end -- a guy who plays all three downs and is just as effective against the run as he is against the pass. And I would love to say this surprises me, but it kind of doesn't. At some point during the '06 season, I was discussing all-things Bengal with Dave Laphman, and for whatever reason Fanene's name came up. Lapham told me Fanene was unblockable in practice -- and off-the-charts strong (this led to a conversation about Samoan strength being a different type of strength, but anyway) -- and that Marvin Lewis (a guy who has no tolerance for oft-injured players) was willing to look past the neverending stream of injuries that kept him out of game after game for those first few seasons.

Again: Unproductive 7th round picks are not allowed to be injured; they're disposable. If you can't stay healthy, I'll find someone who can. But Lewis saw something in Fanene, and now he's developed into a force on America's most underrated unit.

7. In case my eys are deceiving me, Domata Peko is the Bengals' best defensive tackle since Tim Krumrie shattered his leg. This is mostly by default, but still.

8. In case my eyes are deceiving me, Leon Hall and Johnathan Joseph are in the discussion for "Best corner tandem in the NFL." You got another duo playing at a higher level? Do you? I don't.

9. In case my eyes are deceiving me, Morgan Trent is good enough to start for half the teams in the league.

10. In case my eyes are deceiving me, 6'7 Michael Johnson's best pass-rushing move on Sunday was to duck under Steelers left tackle Max Starks. And because it's the Bengals, and because it's 2009, it worked! On multiple occasions!

11. Do I need to keep going?

Look, the defense is good. Really good. They have space eaters and quarterback molesters and instinctive linebackers who chase everyone down. The DBs don't always corral the catchable balls, but they almost always knock them down. I don't see a single weakness on this unit, and there is nothing gimmicky or phony about them, which is why they can win the Super Bowl.

And I'll keep repeating the line until I convince myself it's a possibility...

The Bengals can win the Super Bowl!

-Brad Spieser (

Monday, November 16, 2009

Belichick Goes For It On 4th Down; People Overreact


"It was the worst coaching decision I've ever seen Belichick make."

-Rodney Harrison

The quoted man above said these words last night on NBC's postgame show. Harrison also said something about Belichick sending a message to his young defense that he has no confidence in them. It means that he has no confidence in his young D against a bloody hot Peyton Indianapolis...on a Sunday night.

It means that he has plenty of confidence in Tom Brady, only one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, to move the ball two yards on the game's most critical play.

That makes sense, don't it?

Don't it?

Besides, not getting the first down did not ensure a Colts victory; it merely put them in a better position to prevail. Remember, the Colts were trailing by six, not two. Even after the Pats botched the 4th & 2, the Colts were probably no better than a 50/50 shot to win. I know a Colts win seemed inevitable (and count me among those who figured Manning would close it out), but the Patriots still had a great shot to walk out of there with a win.

So, would I have punted? Probably, yeah (but maybe not).

Regardless, it was nowhere near the coaching blunder everyone is making it out to be.

Fact: If Kevin Faulk doesn't juggle Brady's pass, the sports world is stroking Belichick for having the onions to go for it on their own 28-yard line.

I hate people.

-Brad Spieser (

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Gambling: Season Two, Episode 12 (Hating My Unborn Offspring)

Feeling less than superb this morning. In related news, I want to die. In related news, I hope the world ends the second after I die. In related news, that means I don't care about the lives of my great grandchildren's great grandchildren. In related news, my great grandchildren's great grandchildren were probably headed for drug addiction, anyway.

"I love me some me."

-Terrell Owens and other blacks (and maybe whites).

Saturday Vickers...

Put $100.00 on this: USC (-10.5) vs. Cardinal of Stanford, California

And then put $150.00 on this: TCU (-21) vs. Utah Runnin' Utes

And then put $300.00 on this: Duke (+13.5) vs. Rambling Wreck

And then put $300.00 on this: Central Florida (+4.5) vs. Houston Fighting Klinglers

And then count your money.

And then play in traffic.

-Brad Spieser (

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Tall Kid, Changing Skin Color, Mormon Beater, Etc.

Not one, not two, but three different stories have literally kept me glued to the television and/or computer over the past ten days. Literally. Glue.

And the stories? (1.) The 7'4 football playing middle-schooler; (2.) Sammy Sooser becoming a honkey overnight; (3.) That crazy lady who beat up a few dozen Mormons over the course of a ninety-minute collegiate soccer match.

See for yourself:


-Brad Spieser (

Ochocinco + Paterno = Me Laughing

Chad Ochocinco was a guest on Collin Cowherd's radio program today. For reasons you'll soon understand I found the following exchange fascinating:

Cowherd: By the way, Chris Henry broke his arm; how does that change things for

Ochocinco: Oh man. Dude, dude, dude, I was in tears on the field. I
was in tears on the field, man. That is a big blow to our offense. That is an
enormous blow to our offense. To lose someone of that magnitude is really
upsetting. But we have to find a way. We have people that are going to have to
step up, step up and play. You know, we got Jerome Simpson, we have Qui ... uh,
Quincy, Quincy...uh...Crosby. He's going to have to step up and play ball...

For the record, the man's first name is Quan, not Quincy. His last name is Cosby, not Crosby.

And I know you expect me to pile on Ochocinco, or wonder what was going through Cosby's mind while this unfolded, but mostly I'm thinking about old people.

Over the weekend I was watching the Ohio State-Penn State contest with my buddy Kevin, and we couldn't get enough of Joe Paterno. Every screen shot of Penn State's soon-to-be 83-year-old head coach generated laughter and entertaining conversation. We talked about his measly salary, the fact that he doesn't wear a headset, how much he probably needs to pee during games, the time he sprinted to the restroom during a game, his maniacal behavior at pep rallies, does he even coach the team, etc.

But the conversation always came back to one question: If you were to line up Penn State's 85 scholarship players in street clothes, how many first and last names would Joe Paterno nail with no hesitation?

Kevin and I never really answered the question, but I think Ochocinco just did. Since training camp, Cosby and Ochocinco have spent hundreds and hundreds (and hell, maybe thousands) of hours together-----not just on the same team, but in WR meetings and drills together. I'm talking the closest of close quarters, since the beginning of August, and yet Ochocinco butchered the man's first and last name on national radio.

A. That's funny.

B. The Bengals selected
Jerome Simpson over DeSean Jackson.

C. What's your best guess-----how many of the current 85 Nittany Lions on scholarship does Joe Paterno know by name? Is there any way the number is higher than forty? I say no.

Please email me your answers.

-Brad Spieser (

Monday, November 9, 2009

Ochocinco Caught The Pass Before He Bribed The Ref!

Okay, everybody's making a big deal about Chad Ochocinco bribing an official, and yeah, it was funny. But what about the lousy call that preceded said bribe?

In case you missed it...

Ochocinco caught the pass near the sideline, inbounds, and was correctly credited with a catch.

Baltimore challenged.

Play overturned. Incomplete pass. Bengals punt. Ravens keep alive slim chance of winning. I punched my nephew until he fell asleep.

For those who didn't miss it (and subsequently disagree with me)...

Yes, the pass was a complete. Watch for yourself (pay attention at the 0:21 mark):

Left foot down, right foot...down. And it was down. His heel hit inbounds before his toes came down out of bounds-----and the moment his heel touched down in the field of play it was a completed pass.

Think of it in terms of a tippy-toed, tight-roping sideline catch...

I ask you: Do WRs in those situations get 100 percent of both feet down inbounds? Of course not. Only the tips of their toes land in bounds, while the rest of their body (including the rest of their feet) crash down out of bounds. what's the difference? I rest my case

1. I love being right.

2. Why am I the only living human being to mention this?

3. The referee who overturned this call should get suspended for, among other things, being a jackass.

Keep the change, you filthy animals.

-Brad Spieser (

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Gambling: Season Two, Episode 11 (And Zach Collaros Is A Superstar)

Two thoughts before making my NFL picks...

1. Zach Collaros is a superstar -- one of the five best QBs in college football -- and there's simply no way UC can go back to Tony Pike at this point.

2. UC's top two QBs are decidedly better than Terrelle Pryor.

3. UC's RB Isaiah Pead is better than any RB on Ohio State's roster.

4. UC WRs Mardy Gilyard, Armon Binns and DJ Woods might all be better than Devier Posey, Ohio State's top WR.

5. And UC's O-Line is obviously superior to Ohio State's semi-embarrassing front.

6. Just saying.

7. Switching to the NFL...Josh Freeman is starting today for Tampa, and if you can guarantee me he'll be starting every game for the rest of the season, I'll guarantee you they'll finish the season without a victory. HE'S TERRIBLE! Trust me.

8. Just glanced at the Bengals' schedule (which I never do)...there's a strong possibility they're either 8-5 or 9-4 after week 13. Jesus. How did this happen?


NFL picks...


Washington (+9) at Atlanta

Colts-Texans UNDER (49.5)

-Brad Spieser (

Friday, November 6, 2009

Gambling: Season Two, Episode 10 (NCAAF Only)

Four crazy lines, four home dogs. The Vickers System is getting a little wacky this week and going with Four $300 5 Star Millennial Locks of the Millennium.

That's right. Horny?

Stanford (+7) vs. The Best Team In College Football (aka Ducks of Oregon)

Tulsa (+1.5) vs. Houston Fighting Klingler Brothers

Kansas State (+2.5) vs. Rock Chalk Reesing

Iowa State (+7.5) vs. Okie State

Last week: Off ($ Not so great)
Overall: Poor ($ Even worse)

NFL picks coming Sunday, and I'm guessing Josh Freeman will be prominently involved.

-Brad Spieser (

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Tales Of Drugs And Domestic Violence!

1. Girl tells her horrific story of boyfriend swinging baseball bat at her head.

2. Boy is chemically altered at the time of hearing this story.

3. Boy laughs uncontrollably upon hearing this story.

4. Boy tells story on podcast.

5. Boy is going to hell.

Please listen to our latest podcast, "Drugs Make You Laugh At Domestic Disputes."

-Brad Spieser (

Ruben Patterson Doesn't Tip (And I Gots Proof)

I am a bartender in downtown Cincinnati. I shouldn't have to explain why this makes me cool. But I will, briefly. Being a bartender in downtown Cincinnati makes me cool because it allows me the opportunity to occasionally ask Edinson Volquez how his elbow is doing. See what I mean? I'm a regular James Dean. Anyway...

A few Sundays ago Ruben Patterson (weighing a good 260) and his crew strolled into my bar, ordered Goose and Patron like the plane was going down, ran up a $209 bill...and tipped us Zero Dollars and Zero Cents.

Don't believe me? Okay, of course you believe me. Either way, see for yourself:

(Note: I didn't take the picture of Patterson's receipt, which explains why his signature isn't in the photo. (1.) If you really need me to, I can produce the copy with his signature. (2.) His middle name is Nathaniel, which is represented on the bill by the letter "N," just another way prove the legitimacy of this post. (3.) Why am I going out of my way to prove the legitimacy of something [i.e., being stiffed by a scumbag millionaire] everybody already believes?)

Funny thing is, this isn't half as bad as some of the horror stories to come out of my time as both a bartender and valet; this is just the only one I can proove. I'd love to tell the Shaun Alexander story, or the Dave Chappelle story, but -- without the evidence -- it wouldn't be worth it.

Can I get a Hooray for Ruben Patterson! Can I get a Hooray for
pleading guilty to attempted rape!


(For everyone who came hear because Mo linked to this story, thanks. But I'd prefer you check out the main page [ ] and listen to the occasionally offensive podcasts.)

-Brad Spieser (

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Delightful Fantasy Football Rant

Reason No. 204 why fantasy football is a wonderful thing: Mean-spirited, grammatically disastrous complaints/threats (this time from my buddy Frank):

"I need help- lets be honest this league needs help. Maybe just maybe its time for me to walk away from this league.Nobody talks, nobody trades, and nobody likes the commish except maybe eric and tom. I have one of the best qbs in the league and i cant give him away, i also have the burner but some people would rather have beanie wells.Whats the point you ask I WANT TO TRADE!!. I offer trades and get no response- does anybody remember the phrase spin the wheelmake a deal before al ruined it.Lets get back to the way it used to be-fun. So if anyone out there except al wants to trade im all ears, please feel free to contact me at anytime- once again not you al. Have a great day except you al"

Okay, a few things...

1. The league referenced in Frank's rant (The Cool Dude Fantasy Football League) has been in place for thirteen years, with many of the original members still competing.

2. The commish is my buddy Al, Frank's cousin and close friend. (Note: I'm co-commissioner.)

3. When Frank refers to "one of the best qbs in the league," he's speaking of Aaron Rodgers.

4. When Frank refers to "the burner," he's speaking of Michael Turner.

5. "Spin the wheel, make a deal" is a phrase used when trying to convince a prospective trading partner to agree to a deal.

6. Again, Al is Frank's cousin and close friend. Recently Al traded Drew Brees for a package Frank felt wasn't as attractive as what he offered; that more or less fueled this rant.

Good times!

-Brad Spieser (